Case law

Progress Solar Solutions, LLC v. Long

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 24, 2020

Bills did not file his motion by the deadline established in the court’s scheduling order. … Alternatively, even if the motion is timely under Rule 12(c), a court should grant the motion if “the moving party has clearly established that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and the party is entitled

State of North Carolina v. Ross

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 20, 2021

Here, plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to establish standing. … on their Appeal Decision website that the Decision has been vacated by removing references to this Decision or qualifying references with a notation that the Decision was vacated, and by taking such other steps as may be

Brimer v. MDElite Laser & Aesthetic, LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 17, 2025

To the extent that Work Product does not qualify as work made for hire under applicable law, Contractor irrevocably transfers, assigns, and conveys to [MDElite] all rights, title, and interest in and to the Work … Brimer and MDElite’s relationship is established by the Consulting Agreement and therefore does not exist outside of the Agreement, any actions or omissions by Dr.

Hudson

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 27, 2026

, licensed optometrists for purposes of establishing visual disorders, licensed podiatrists, and qualified speech-language pathologists.” … Plaintiff’s] subjective depression and anxiety screenings indicates severe levels of both depression and anxiety, and a comment that [Plaintiff’s] assertions of having a home security system and monitoring it extensively is clearly

Daniels v. Hyster-Yale Group, Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 11, 2020

McNeill worked as an engineer and had no sales experience; he was less qualified than Daniels and failed to meet the formal position requirements. Id. ¶¶161−62. … Also weighing against HYG’s refusal to fully respond is the fact that the Federal Rules do not make confidential business information immune from discovery.

Human Rights Defense Center v. Ishee

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 1, 2023

And even if local firms are willing to handle prisoner litigation in some cases, the record fails to establish that there are local firms who could handle this particular litigation. … The impropriety of the actions by NCDAC and its attorney were obvious and clearly violated the Federal Rules. But given the circumstances, it was necessary for HRDC to pursue the motion.

Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass'n v. Wake County Board of Elections

166 F. Supp. 3d 553 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 26, 2016

If that allegation suffices to require justification by the state, virtually no state legislative map will be immune from challenge. See id. at *17-18 (alterations in original). … The Supreme Court, however, rejected that finding as clearly erroneous and concluded that then-Senator Cooper’s statement mentioned not only race, but also partisan and geographic considerations; “and as so read[,] it says

United States v. MacDonald

32 F. Supp. 3d 608 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 24, 2014

and she said to him “very clearly, ‘no I did not. I was not there.’ ” Htr. 610. … It is perhaps the most clearly untrustworthy evidence that I have had put before me....

Owners Insurance Company v. MM Shivah LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 4, 2022

Where a policy does not define a term, a court gives “nontechnical words . .. their meaning in ordinary speech, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning was intended.” … Owners and Manoj agree that Lowrey’s alleged injuries qualify as bodily injuries or personal injuries under Coverage A and Coverage B. See [D.E. 57] 10; cf. [D.E. 60] 7-9.